America’s fears obscure fact of ISIS retreating
Iraqi forces, with heavy U.S. backing, are slowly pushing the Islamic State out of Mosul, the group’s capital in Iraq and the largest city it holds there. Islamic State fighters are fleeing as nearby towns and villages fall.
Losing Mosul is only the latest of catastrophes for the Islamic State, whose leaders have sought to rally their troops by reminding them that they survived near-death in 2008 and would do so again: hardly a sign the group is on the march. Indeed, the Islamic State appears to be losing ground everywhere except in the U.S. presidential campaign.
Donald J. Trump has used the Islamic State menace to club Democrats, claiming President Barack Obama has boxed U.S. generals in with a “strategy that is destined to fail.” Hillary Clinton, too, regularly discusses the Islamic State, though her rhetoric is far more measured.
Polls from earlier in 2016 showed that 73 percent of Americans saw the Islamic State as a “very serious” threat to the United States, and another 17 percent saw it as “moderately serious” — a rare issue that crosses political lines. Almost 80 percent believed the Islamic State has assets in the United States and can “launch a major terrorist attack against the U.S. at any time.”
It seems hard to persuade Americans of good news: The Islamic State is hemorrhaging.
The group has lost almost half its lands in Iraq and a quarter of what it controlled in Syria, including territory along the border with Turkey that was vital for the free flow of foreign fighters.
Coalition bombing of its oil assets and the collapse of its tax base as it has lost control of various cities are impoverishing a once-rich group. The flow of foreign fighters has plummeted: As many as 2,000 recruits crossed over from Turkey per month in 2015; in 2016, this figure is closer to 50.
ISIS expansion outside Iraq and Syria also is being reversed. Its most promising “province” around Sirte in Libya is now in the hands of pro-government fighters. Instead of trumpeting the Islamic State’s accomplishment, its news organs are conceding the group might lose its territory everywhere.
The Obama administration and its allies do not deserve all, or even most, of the credit: The Islamic State is responsible for much of its own undoing. It has warred against Russia, Iran, the Lebanese Hezbollah, the Syrian and Iraqi regimes, France and the United States, among other foes. While it was working, this “us against the world” inspired zealots everywhere, but the world usually wins such contests in the end.
It is premature to write the Islamic State’s obituary, but it would be ideal if the presidential candidates focused on the hard questions: What to do to keep the Islamic State down and how to stop, or at least contain, conflict in the region?
In 2010, when it was just the Islamic State of Iraq, the group seemed on the verge of defeat. Ordinary Iraqis had turned against the group, and U.S. and Iraqi government forces devastated its ranks. The group held on by abandoning its territorial control, using guerrilla war and terrorism to continue attacks while waiting for its opponents, including the United States, to misstep — which they did.
The United States must also think long-term. Working with local partners, it must prepare for a grinding fight against Islamic State guerrillas and help allies govern the territories they rule. Unfortunately, local states and groups fighting the Islamic State are intensely suspicious of one another. Some are already shooting at each other, and others like the Lebanese Hezbollah or Russia are hardly America’s friends.
More international terrorism understandably looks like failure, but it should be expected. Whether committed by returning foreign fighters or “lone wolves,” terrorism is all the more likely because the Islamic State itself is trying to internationalize the conflict.
Despite relatively few deaths since 9/11, Americans’ fear of terrorism has not diminished. Unfortunately, when politicians play up the threat it exaggerates the impact of even small attacks, making the Islamic State seem more powerful than it is.
Daniel Byman is a professor and senior associate dean at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service and a senior fellow in the Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings.
This story was originally published October 28, 2016 at 7:36 PM with the headline "America’s fears obscure fact of ISIS retreating."